sw1mushfandomcom-20200215-history
Forum:IC Dates
I've been noticing some dating discrepancies with older logs/information. As far as SWINFO tells us, the years on the MUSH start in March and go through until next March. That's what has been used for as long as I can remember. Looking at SWINFO for 6 ABY, we see that it has the Battle of Etti IV listed under 6 ABY; we can then infer that it took place sometime between March 1997 and March 1998, which is what 6 ABY falls under if we go by the March-March system that's set up. However, as I go through the very old logs I've dug up over time, it seems this wasn't always the case. For the logs concerning the incident at Etti IV, mentioned above, they are dated by the various people who logged the event. Han Solo was arrested in late November of '96, the trouble brewed in December, and he was finally turned over to Sabbath in February of '97, which is all 5 ABY. He was rescued and returned to the NR in very early March of '97, which starts 6 ABY. So the actual incident and battle of Etti IV occurred in 5 ABY if we go by the actual logs of the event, while SWINFO tells us it occurred in 6 ABY. Now if we go by a more normal calendar system (January-January for our IC years), then November 96 is still 5 ABY; but January and February of 97, where the battle apparently intensifies and Solo is turned over to the Empire, occurs in 6 ABY, which would validate SWINFO, because instead of January and February of 97 being 5 ABY with the March-March system, it becomes 6 ABY. I think that, originally, the MUSH went by a regular, real-world calendar system. January started the IC new year and so forth. But, by 9 ABY, or 2000, the MUSH transferred to a March to March system (because if you look at SWINFO, it doesn't actually start to say March until 9 ABY; previously it was just ~1997 or something like that). So, that leaves us with several decisions. Do we keep the March-March system and go back and change the dates of older events/logs? Or do we get rid of it, revert to a January system? Doing this, however, will cause many recent events to be shifted in date, including stuff going on right now. So I think it'll be a lot more simpler to simply keep the March-March system and just go back and fix the few "errors" in old MUSH history. This, however, would mean invalidating SWINFO (which I know many people covet), as the Etti IV stuff would have to be shifted to 5 ABY and so forth. --Danik Kreldin 05:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC) Prior to the official March-to-March year, there was no official MUSH year. The calendar advanced randomly whenever people decided it should -- sometimes at the conclusion of major plots, sometimes in-line with RL calendar. I don't find this difficult to accept and see no compelling reason to go back and make everything fit a unified calendar. If 6 ABY lasted 18 RL months or whatever... so be it. IC doesn't have to be equal to RL. What happened in the past is what happened in the past. Those events are not "errors". -- Xerxes 15:23, 23 November 2007 (UTC) I would like to agree with Xerxes on this. However, as far as decisions go on the dating system, what we have currently set in game is the way it should be reflected on here. As far as going back and changing I think that is a bad idea just to have it in one format. What I'd really like to refrain from is making decisions on a forum here that aren't official per the actual MUSH. -AKA things like invalidating SWINFO. --Nasa eagle 17:51, 23 November 2007 (UTC) *Well, when I started playing on the MUSH, and from that point on, the MUSH went by a March-March calendar. When March started, it meant a new IC year. So I had assumed it had always been like that (and from what I can tell, it still is going... so I imagine March of '08, only a few months away, will start 17 ABY). I didn't know it was random back then. And Krieg, I was just bringing it to attention because I had noticed some discrepancies based on what I knew - now that I know that there wasn't any set dates back then like there are now, it doesn't matter. It will only make it a little harder to categorize some older logs, so I'll just use "circa" or whatever fits. --Danik Kreldin 21:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC) **Also, I was basing it on having been told several times that 1 RL day = 1 IC day, except during TPs when several real life days could be condensed into several IC hours or some other circumstance that requires. --Danik Kreldin 21:41, 23 November 2007 (UTC)